I laughed out loud when a Bernie or Buster called me to ask how to get THE petition to put Jill Stein and the Green Party on the ballot. Like so many people, this caller had no idea that there are 51 different procedures to put a Presidential candidate on the ballot in 51 states.

As of this writing, August 2, we are on the ballot in 23 states, have filed to be on the ballot in another 11, and are actively petitioning in 13. We are almost certainly not going to be on in 4- NC, OK, IN, and SD.

Each state has different requirements to put a minor party or independent Presidential candidate on the ballot, and each state has a different level of organization and activism in its Green Party. This has made the 2016 Ballot Access drive a combination of a scavenger hunt and an obstacle course.

The first step is naturally to find teams of people willing to commit to get the Green Party Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates on the ballot in their states. Not surprisingly, where strong state Green Parties exist, we already have ballot access. In the other states, it was like chasing ghosts and shadows of Greens. Eventually, though, we did find people committed to leading the charge in just about every state.

The next step is to get the proper petition form. Some states require the Presidential Electors be listed on the petition. Some states require the Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates to sign the top of the petition before it is circulated. Logistically difficult, to say the least, especially since we don’t choose the VP until the August Convention.

Then comes the question of who can circulate the petitions. In some states you have to be a resident. In other states you cannot circulate petitions for more than one candidate for the same office. In some states, you cannot be paid by the signature- and in a bizarre twist, in Nebraska, your petition has to have a disclaimer, printed in red, that you are either a paid petitioner or a volunteer petitioner.

Starting to get complicated? It gets worse. Who can sign the petition? Again, different in every state. Some places you can not sign if you voted in a major party primary. Others, if you signed for another Presidential candidate. You have to be a registered voter to sign (everywhere but North Dakota). In Wyoming, if you did not vote in the 2014 General Election, you are removed from the voter rolls.

Lastly, each state has different review and approval processes. Both Nevada and Georgia actually compare the signatures to scans of the original voter registration forms. Never mind the sig may be ten or twenty years old, or that the person may have signed the petition in a shopping center parking lot in the 100 degree heat.

All this gory detail to say: state ballot laws are written to prevent so called third party and independent candidates from getting on the ballot. You never see the Democrats or Republicans worrying how many state ballots they will be on.

In just about every other democracy, voters always have four or five or more parties to choose from on their ballots. They are not told year after year and election after election that there are only two choices. And as a result, they have much higher rates of voter participation.

We are all focused on getting on the ballot right now for the 2016 election, and we have been enduring these grotesque carnival rides every election since 1996. Twenty years of weaving through houses of mirrors put up by unethical state legislatures and election administrators. The way forward is to challenge these laws- in the courts and in state houses.

In the last few years, GA, PA, and OK have lowered their signature thresholds. NV, NM, and other states have been told their deadlines are unconstitutionally early. Bans on out of state petitioners have been thrown out. CO has made it a law that any party with 1000 or more registered members is entitled to ballot access.

We also need to fight for universal voter registration. Laws like the one in Wyoming that disenfranchise people, and other hurdles like requiring voter ID need to be dismantled- and every eligible voter needs to be made a registered voter- Motor Voter on steroids!

We all know that the US has one of the worst rates of voter participation of any democracy. Many if not most of these non-voters would be Green voters, if given the opportunity and the ability.

I urge every one of you to work for a better democracy by making your state ease ballot access restrictions. To paraphrase a line from freepress.net: if Green Ballot Access is not your number one issue, it needs to be your number two issue.

Rick Lass is national ballot access coordinator for Jill Stein for President. He has been a Green Party officer and candidate in New Mexico.

A history of Green mayors in the United StatesBy Mike FeinsteinGreen Party of California

Mayor Jason West (left) of New Paltz, New York gained considerable attention by conducting same-sex marriages. Photo by Rachel Lagodka

With Gayle McLaughlin’s election as Mayor of Richmond, CA, there are now three new Green mayors in the United States. The other two are Larry Bragman (Fairfax, CA) and Sam Pierce (Sebast­opol, CA). They join Matthew Ash (Boswell, PA) and Jason West (New Paltz, NY) to make five current Green Mayors across the country.

Resident voters all directly elected McLaughlin (article on page 3), Ash and West, whereas city council members appointed Bragman and Pierce. This reflects the two primary ways mayors are chosen across the nation, and shows the country’s two most common forms of municipal government: council-manager and mayor-council.

Since 1991, thirty-five Greens have served as mayors, with eleven directly elected and twenty-four appointed.

Almost all U.S. cities that have appointed mayors, utilize the council-manager forms of government, where the elected city council provides political leadership and makes policy, while a full-time professional manager directs city departments in carrying out policies.

Of cities that have directly elected mayors, in most cases the mayor still has equal or similar power as other council members. These are usually called weak-mayor systems.

A number of large cities however, like New York, Chicago and Los Angeles, or even more moderate sized ones like Baltimore, Minneapolis and Seattle, have directly elected ‘strong mayors’ who serve as chief executives of their cities. The closest a Green came to winning one of these races was Matt Gonzalez’s historic San Francisco November 2003 run, when he came in a close second with 47.2 percent of the votes.

The first U.S. Green mayor – elected or appointed – was Kelly Weaverling in Cordova, Alaska (1991-1993). Weaverling was directly elected in the aftermath of the Exxon Valdez oil spill. He had been an important activist there, heavily involved in the post-spill cleanup. Weaverling, with an extensive knowledge of the oiled areas, led the Wildlife Rescue Fleet. The fleet was a group of 40 vessels and more than 200 people who acted as the search and rescue unit for all oiled animals. The reputation he gained as part of this effort got him elected as mayor in his first run for public office.

Since Weaverling’s election, all directly elected mayors have been from small towns. Before McLaughlin, the only city over 7,000 was Websters Grove, MO (2000 pop. 23,000) where Terry Williams was mayor between 1994-1997.

Perhaps the most well known Green mayor has been West. Elected in 2003 when he was only 26 years old, he made national news in February 2004 for performing same-sex civil marriages. He was ultimately prevented from doing so by the courts.

The city with the most years with a Green mayor has been Sebastopol, CA (five), with Larry Robinson (2000-2001 & 2004-2005), Sam Spooner (2001-2002), Craig Litwin (2002) and now Pierce. The Sebastopol Greens have had a city council majority during these same years.

After McLaughlin’s election, Richmond is now the largest city to have a Green mayor. Before that it was Santa Monica, CA (pop. 90,000) where Mike Feinstein was appointed between 2000 and 2002. During that time the Green Party of the United States held its major national press conference in Santa Monica to announce it was filing for national committee status with the Federal Election Commission (taking advantage of Feinstein’s status as mayor, as well as, the presence of a second Green on the Council and a third on the city’s Rent Control Board.)

In Minnesota, Elaine Fleming concluded her second and final term as mayor this November. In 2002, Fleming became the first Native American to be elected as mayor of tiny Cass Lake, a city located within the reservation boundaries of the Leech Lake Band of the Ojibwe tribe of northern Minnesota. Dur­ing her time in office, she took on issues of pollution and neglect in a town that had been a Superfund toxic waste site for almost two decades. Referring to environmental racism as “terrorism in our communities”, Fleming got results. State and federal officials are now testing soil and developing remediation plans, with Fleming pressing them every step of the way.

The last specks of democracy and sovereignty we the people have left in the U.S. are under attack.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is an international trade pact crafted by multinational corporations and currently being negotiated in secret by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR). Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Alan Grayson of Florida de­scribes the agreement as “an attack on democratic governance” and “a punch in the face to the middle class of America.” Green Party activists played a critical role in stopping “free” trade deals of the past. It is critical that we step up our game, join with our social movement allies, and help stop the TPP.

The TPP began as trade talks among a few Pacific Rim countries, but has been expanded to include Australia, Brunei, Can­ada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam. While the public and media are not allowed to see the text, and members of Congress only receive limited, heavily restricted ac­cess, 600 corporations have been advising President Obama and suggesting amendments as they have full access to the documents. These include Monsanto, Walmart, Bank of America, JP Morgan, Pfizer, Cargill, Exxon-Mobil, and Chevron—some of the worst corporate citizens in the U.S.

If ratified, the TPP would establish a system of international tribunals (if it sounds creepy, that’s because it is) allowing corporations to challenge the laws, regulations and even court decisions of any member country—including local, county and state laws—if they are deemed to adversely im­pact the corporation’s expected future profits. Under the TPP’s “investor-state” provision, corporations would even be allowed to file preemptive lawsuits against proposed government actions before they are undertaken. In New York, for example, this could bring harsh challenges to municipalities that have passed anti-fracking legislation or enacted consumer protection laws. Currently, 180 New York municipalities have local ban on hydraulic fracturing, not counting the statewide defacto ban on frack­ing announcement on December 17, 2014.

If the TPP includes “investor-state” provisions similar to those in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), gas companies could sue the U.S. for loss of profits resulting from local bans, similarly to what they are doing in Quebec and El Salvador. Quebec has a moratorium on fracking and U.S. based firm, Lone Pine Resources Inc., is suing the government of Canada for $250 million for lost profits. Similarly, the Canadian based Pacific Rim gold mining company is suing El Salva­dor for more than US$300m in compensation, after the tiny Central American country refused to allow it to dig for gold which would endanger the Lempa River, the water source for half of El Salvador’s population. These types of direct assaults on democracy must be stopped.

Provisions in the TPP threaten our local economy and the growing Buy Local movement of which many Greens are a part. Back in 2010, New York Senator Gillibrand ex­pressed concern about the TPP’s impact on New York’s dairy farmers if local markets were to be flooded by imported dairy products from New Zealand. In a press release, Gillibrand stated, “I am especially concerned about the long-term national security implications of losing our ability to produce food here at home. We cannot outsource our dairy production to the lowest global bidder without risking the safety of our health and our local economies.” Gilli­brand might as well be talking about NAFTA and it’s im­pact on Mexico’s corn growers. Millions of Mexican farmers who could no longer compete with heavily subsidized U.S. crops were displaced from their land, setting off a wave of migration northward.

The TPP is being negotiated under unprecedented secrecy because previous attempts to pass similar “free trade” pacts have been met with widespread public opposition. What’s particularly glaring is the consensus among U.S. political elites pushing these trade deals, from Clinton to Bush to Obama.

Currently, President Obama is looking for Congress to pass “fast track” trade promotion legislation. We can’t let this happen. “Fast Track” gives the White House authority to negotiate and sign the trade agreement without Congressional oversight. Lawmakers won’t be able to analyze or amend treaty provisions; they would only be able to vote “yes” or “no” to ratify the entire treaty. In order to stop the TPP, we must first stop Fast Track. Thus, the task at hand is to unite with our allies in labor, environmental, human rights, and democracy movements and lobby our congressional representatives as hard as possible to stop “Fast Track.” This is a time to be more than activists—we must be organizers. Activist organizations are already on alert that the TPP and Fast Track are bad news—all we need to do is activate our networks. In New York, Greens will be promoting TPP Tues­days, weekly call-ins to Congress urging representatives to vote “No” on Fast Track. While this might seem like a small action, it’s important to have doable actions for activists of all experience levels to participate in – and the goal is to recruit more and more people to make calls every week, to be organizers. We the people need to make sure that Congress does not abrogate its Constitutional responsibility to regulate trade and protect our national sovereignty.

TPP would establish a system of international tribunals allowing corporations to challenge the laws, regulations and even court decisions of any member country if they are deemed to adversely impact the corporation’s expected future profits.

Expansion of unregulated, free trade isn’t inevitable. Grassroots movements in the past have successfully stopped the Multilateral Agreement on Investment, the Free Trade Area of the Americas, the expansion of the World Trade Organization, and others. Greens played an important role in stopping these undemocratic foreign policy initiatives.

The global justice movement broke into the American public consciousness with the November 1999 protest against the World Trade Organization (WTO) meeting in Seattle. According to observations by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffery St. Clair of Counterpunch, “The mostly young people pouring up Interstate 5 from Oregon and California and other states were the green street warriors who had managed by Nov­ember 30 to paralyze downtown Seattle and shut down the opening ceremonies of the WTO conference. And these same young people made up the core organizers of Ralph Nader’s Green Party candidacy…”

Activists who had been very active in the grassroots global justice movement of the 1990s already were or became Green Party leaders. Ralph Nader was treated like a rock star at the Seattle WTO protests because of his early opposition to NAFTA and the Multi-lateral Agreement on Invest­ment (MAI). Medea Benjamin, co-founder of Global Exchange, one of the most prominent global justice organizations in the U.S., went on to run for U.S. Senate in California as a Green candidate. Ben Manski, who had been active in national campus organizing in the lead up to the Seattle protest, eventually became the national staff person for the Campus Greens and is known to many today as campaign manager of the 2012 Jill Stein for President campaign. David Cobb, active in Texas mobilizing for the Seattle WTO protests and against the MAI, was the Green Party’s candidate for President in 2004.

In the Spring of 2001, the Campus Greens’ Green Heat campaign mobilized hundreds of students on American campuses to attend the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas protests at the Summit of the Americas in Quebec City. Greens organized teach-ins on campuses, in community centers and living rooms and participated in solidarity demonstrations across the U.S. One such demonstration on April 21, 2001 temporarily closed the Detroit-Windsor border. This campaign raised the visibility of the Campus Greens and drove the student effort to mobilize around the issue of international trade.

Green Party activists from all over the U.S. joined their allies in the global justice movement on November 17, 2003, in Miami to protest the Free Trade Area of the Americas, a trade pact modeled after NAFTA. It’s estimated that 22,000 people marched in Miami’s streets against the FTAA: unionists, civil rights groups, community organizations, farmers, students, Mexicans, and Canadians. The united message was “No to closed-door trade meetings. No to corporate-made law. No to the race to the bottom. No to the FTAA.” Over 300 Green flags were on display at the protest in Miami and Greens were warmly welcomed by other protesters.

The fight against the TPP is a continuation of these struggles against the neoliberal trade regime that is propelling a global race to the bottom. This is a fight about how society will be organized, and who has the authority to make those decisions. It’s corporate capital against people’s movements. If we want to create a democratic economic system and stop today’s ruling elite from dictating the terms of how we live, we must stop the TPP and all free trade schemes that will follow. As a party committed to grassroots democracy and a just, peaceful future, the Green Party must take seriously our obligation to fight against global corporate rule, wherever that fight manifests itself: in the streets, at public hearings (which can be used as educational and organizing opportunities), in the courts and at the ballot box. Stopping the TPP is within our reach—we must use this historic opportunity, like Green Party activists have in the past, to work alongside social movements wherever we are. We must resist everywhere. We must offer alternatives everywhere. And our objective must be to win.

To learn more about efforts to stop the TPP, get online and check out the Green Shadow Cabinet, Flush the TPP, Public Cit­izen…there are endless resources available. Don’t wait…participate!

An Interview of Margaret FlowersGreen Shadow Cabinet Secretary of Health

Photo: Alton Christensen

Margaret Flowers, a Maryland physician who has spoken out on national media, was interviewed in March 2015 on Between the Lines, an independent weekly radio program. Radio host Melinda Tuhus spoke with Flowers who is co-director of Popular Re­sis­tance.org, a resource website for activists which also organizes several campaigns, including “Flush the TPP.”

President Obama is pushing hard for congressional approval of trade promotion, or fast track authority, that many believe is essential for passage of the Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade agree­ment, or TPP. Congressional leaders from both parties support the trade proposal, while progressive Democrats and tea party Republicans mostly oppose it. Congres­sion­al approval of the TPP would give corporations even more power than they ac­quired under earlier trade deals like NAFTA to set the trade agenda and override environmental, health and labor protections. Here, she talks about the pressure now being exerted on Democrats who favor the TPP and the consequences if the controversial trade deal wins passage.

MARGARET FLOWERS: The members of Congress were home this week for Presi­dent’s week and so this was a perfect time for people around the country make their member of Congress know that they’re opposed to fast track. So there were actions across the country; in Oregon they had a bus touring the whole country. Oregon is really a critical state because Sen. Ron Wyden is the ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, and that’s the committee where they will introduce fast-track legislation. The Republican chair of that committee is really pushing Sen. Wyden to join him in sponsoring that legislation, and if he does that, that will allow cover for the other Senate Democrats to go ahead and support it as well. So he’s really crucial. And we’re glad to see that Oregon voters have spoken out loudly, as well. There was a poll just released this past week showing that 73 percent of Oregon voters oppose fast-track, which is great. Sixty-two percent oppose TPP. So we gotta put him in the hot seat.

BETWEEN THE LINES: I know you kind of said this, but just to be clear, he is a Democrat.

MARGARET FLOWERS: Yes, he’s a Demo­crat. And other exciting thing that happened this past week – and this is something that people can do all over the country – is that Richmond, California, voted to be a TPP-free zone, as well as Vermont introduced legislation making their whole state TPP-free. What communities are doing is they’re making resolutions to say, “If you negotiate this agreement in secret and then you rush it through Congress without us knowing what’s in it and how it will affect our communities, we’re not going to obey that.” That’s not constitutional. It’s undemocratic.

And so we’re gonna stand up and protect our communities, because the TPP will affect people in their local communities. Part of it requires that local laws be harmonized with rules inside the TPP, as well as it gives corporations greater power to challenge us if we pass laws to protect our health, safety, workers, our environment.

BETWEEN THE LINES: So, can you be specific at all…like, what could be different if fast-track is approved and the TPP passes?

MARGARET FLOWERS: Right, so fast-track is really key to stopping this, because that would allow to put it through Congress without debates or amendments. If this passes, we see this as a real game-changer. Among other things, as I mentioned having to harmonize our laws, it does give corporations the right to sue if any laws interfere with their expected profits. Now, this is new. Under NAFTA, we had corporations suing if something interfered with money they had invested, but this allows them to sue for much more money because they can say, “We wanted to frack in your community, but you banned it. We would have made billions of dollars, so if you want to get away with banning fracking, you’re going to have to pay us billions of dollars.” And communities just don’t have that kind of money, so it will force them to repeal those laws.

This is really scary, because it happens outside of our judicial system. It’s in a court that is staffed by corporate lawyers, and we have no right of appeal. Their decision is binding.

BETWEEN THE LINES: Actually, my congresswoman in Connecticut, Rosa DeLauro, is one of the leaders of the Democrats fighting fast-track. It’s interesting to see the coming together of some of the more progressive Democrats with some of the tea party Republicans, because, for different reasons, both are opposed. So, after this past week of activities, what do you have up your sleeve? What’s next?

MARGARET FLOWERS: And Congress­woman DeLauro’s been fantastic, and held an excellent press conference, which really broke through the media blackout that’s been going on, so we congratulate her and thank her for that. We expect that when Congress returns from their recess, they will move to introduce fast-track legislation in late February or early March. And we think we have about two months to stop it. If we can push them back to May without passing it, then we start getting into the presidential election and the next election cycle, and nobody really wants to touch this in an election cycle. So this is really a critical time, and we’re going to be urging people to use a tool we have called Stop­FastTrack.com, to contact their members of Congress, to also join our rapid response team where we’ll identify people and places that we need to be in order to put pressure on them and we’ll need people to be ready to mobilize for that. But everybody, wherever you are, can contact your member of Congress. Thank them if they are opposed to fast-track and urge them to stay strong, and if they’re not opposed to fast-track, you need to push them.

BETWEEN THE LINES: And is there an easy way to find out where your congress­person or senator stands on this, or do you just have to call the office?

MARGARET FLOWERS: You know, it’s an interesting moment because, for reasons, people are not really willing to list who is for or against. They don’t want the other side to have this information. So really, it means that people individually need to contact their member of Congress to find out where they stand.

BETWEEN THE LINES: Just one thing; you mentioned that when the elections come closer, elected officials don’t want to touch this. Why?

MARGARET FLOWERS: Because they know that we have a more than 20-year history with these types of agreements, that people in this country are aware of the detriment they do to us, so it is actually politically toxic and can be used against them in an election cycle.

Why should you come to the 2015 Green Party Annual Meeting in St. Louis in July? We’ve all invested time getting to gatherings that end up being great chances to hang out for a couple days … but not much else. This year’s meeting will feature much more than just a gathering. We are planning a shorter but more productive National Committee Meeting on Friday and Sun­day morning. We’re working with local activ­ists to provide workshops and possibly events on racial justice in the wake of Ferg­uson. There will be several days of issue and skill-building workshops, electoral strategy sessions, and panel discussions. This year we are planning a special key­note or panel for Saturday during lunch (included in the cost of registration). The point is this: our Annual Meeting is not just a place to talk about the issues and see old friends (although it is that too). It’s also a place where we continue to work on our strategic plan, begin new projects, and build alliances with local activists.

We have a great opportunity to help Missouri get on the ballot in 2016. Missouri is one of the key states for ballot access. We will be setting up petitioning times at key locations, including a Sunday afternoon session for those that want to stay over Sunday night.

St. Louis in July is where our work will get stronger. We need you there. We have a special price for early-bird registrations. The first 50 people to register before April 15 will pay $90. After April 15 or 50 paid registrations the price will be $125. We also have a “Friends and Family” discount – $75 per person for non-delegates after one registration is purchased at $90. States that wish to purchase registrations may do so at the $90 rate and assign names to those registrations later.

This year’s venue is the most affordable we have had in many years. If cost considerations have prevented you from attending in the past, this is the year to join us. You can have a private room in a suite with a shared in-suite bathroom and 3 meals for less than $50 a day.

St. Louis is a focus city for Southwest Airlines and is served by American, Delta, Frontier, United, and US Airways. Amtrak trains run daily from Chicago and Kansas City. Megabus runs from Dallas, Memphis, Chicago, Little Rock and other Missouri locations. There is a MetroLink stop right on campus less than two blocks from the meeting space and residence hall. It is a few stops from the airport to the campus.

We are putting together a program filled with events and workshops, but there will still be time to see some of the attractions St. Louis has to offer. See the Gate­way Arch, the St. Louis Art Museum, the Citygarden, and much more.

Please register as soon as possible. States that wish to purchase registrations may do so and assign names to those registrations later. All registrations are non-refundable but they are transferable. Reg­ister online at signups-gpus.nationbuilder .com/2015_anm.

Wisconsin Greens call for measures for change in their stateby Mike McCallister, Wisconsin Green Party

Wisconsin Green Party was a part of protests objecting to the killing of unarmed Dontre Hamilton in Milwaukee.Photo by Mike McCallister

From Michael Brown in Ferguson to Eric Garner in New York City to Dontre Hamilton in Milwaukee, there is an epidemic of police violence against unarmed black men in the United States. In Wisconsin in recent years, we’ve also seen white men like Michael Bell killed by police, and white vigilantes kill Corey Stingley for shoplifting in suburban Milwaukee.

This systemic pattern of excessive force has caused a sense of fear among blacks even in routine encounters with officers, eroding the trust in law enforcement that is essential to keeping our communities safe. The problem of police brutality is inextricably connected to Wisconsin’s runaway mass incarceration of people of color, showing an urgent need to reform our criminal justice system.

These deaths are preventable. Meas­ures can be taken to solve this problem. Among them include:

Hold truly independent investigations of police killings. Wisconsin law requires in­dependent investigations, but Dontre Ham­il­ton’s killing was investigated by retired Milwaukee detectives—from the same de­partment they were investigating. We call for a new, truly independent investigation of Hamilton’s killing, and for rules to ensure the independence of all future investigations.

A massive overhaul of Wisconsin’s justice system to address problems in­cluding: unrestrained police and prosecutorial power, privatization of prisons resulting in economic incentive to lock up more people, racial profiling and policies like “stop and frisk,” “zero tolerance,” as well as mandatory sentencing, which erode judicial discretion.

Establish independent citizen re­view boards to monitor police behavior, with the power to press charges and issue subpoenas.

Eliminate the sense of impunity that law enforcement officers and vigilantes enjoy when they commit harassment, assault, and extrajudicial killing of blacks. We must put an end to a law enforcement culture where even routine traffic stops turn into incidents of abuse for which police are never investigated and held accountable.

End militarization of local police. Stop training civilian police in military tactics and end provision of military equipment to police departments, which results in actions like SWAT raids for minor violations.

Stop the mass incarceration of people of color. Wisconsin has a higher percentage of black men in prison and parole than any other state. At 12.8 percent, Wisconsin’s incarceration rate for black men is almost double the national rate of 6.7 percent. Wisconsin also incarcerates a higher percentage of its Native American men than any other state.

Every officer should wear a body video camera. While not a complete solution for these systemic problems, the use of body cameras would be a tangible first step to deter abusive behavior by officers.

Legalize marijuana and end the “War on Drugs.” Criminalizing and incarcerating people for victimless crimes, like selling and using marijuana, has needlessly destroyed lives, wasted huge amounts of public money, and fueled organized crime. Systemic racism in the enforcement of “drug war” policies has been a key driver of mass incarceration and worsening relations between law enforcement and communities of color. We call for legalization and regulation of marijuana, and replacement of drug prohibition policies with a harm reduction approach.

Shahid Buttar, Green Shadow Cabinet Director of Civil Rights Enforcement and a constitutional lawyer was arrested this March by Capitol police in Washington D.C. at the end of a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing in which Director of National Intelligence James Clapper testified. Buttar was arrested for asking these questions of Clapper as Clapper was leaving the court room:

“In March 2013, you misled the Senate Intelligence Committee about the scope of NSA surveillance. What do you have to say to communities of color that are so hyper-policed that we’re subjected to extrajudicial assassination for selling loose cigarettes, when you can get away with perjury before the Senate?”

“Why is your agency above the law, sir? …Why can you lie to the Senate about mass surveillance presuming the entire globe to be subject to pervasive collection, twisting the meaning of the terms in violations of the statutes in the Constitution restraining your agency?”

“Why are you above the law for perjury and why is the NSA above the law for mass surveillance, even violating the contours that the authors of the Patriot Act intended to authorize in 2001? … And Senators, why won’t you do your job? You’re charged with oversight of these officials.”

Buttar later said, “I asked a simple question of a public official in a public setting that no elected member of Congress has had the independence to ask: how can you lie to Congress and get away with it? It’s a disturbing sign of our draconian times that posing that question is an alleged crime while Clapper’s lies to Congress remain unpunished and tacitly rewarded. Welcome to America!”

Christina Gonzalez and Matthew Swaye are suing the New York Police Department for wrongfully arresting them four different times. As activists who videoed pro­tests and police actions, in 2012 police made posters of Gonzalez and Swaye, calling them top-list “professional agitators.” Gonzalez was able to document on video her being attacked and pushed to the ground by police at a 2011 Occupy Wall Street Rally. She has been active towards ending the Stop and Frisk policy. She ran for New York City Council on the Green Party ticket in 2013. Her campaign focused on many issues in­cluding police brutality reparation and prevention, as well as education reform.

Encouraging more women to run for office as Greensby Ann Link, Green Party of New York State

“Mommy, what did you do in the War on Women?”

From a speech given by Ann Link, a long-time Green and feminist at the 2011 New Jersey Green Party convention.

What’s the current situation for women in office in the United States and in the Green Party? As of 2008, the U.S. ranked 68th out of 134 nations worldwide in representation by women (according to The Nation that ranking has now dropped to 98th out of 185 countries). Only 17.2 percent of the members of the U.S. House of Representatives are women, and only 17 of the 100 members of the U.S. Senate are women, 13 of whom were appointed (in 2013 women only represented 20 percent of U.S. congressional seats). In 2010, 79 women ran for office on the Green Party line out of a total of 355, which is 22.3 percent (for 2013 that only increased to 33 percent). Clearly, the Green Party has a long way to go toward 50 percent equity.

Numerous studies have shown that countries with a high proportion of women in office have better economic opportunities and protections for women and children. How can we encourage more women to run for office?

First, women must organize themselves inside and outside of the Green Party. Be­ing organized provides valuable experience for women and gives them a power base on which to build if they decide to run for office. The national Green Party Women’s Caucus invites women to participate.

Second, Green Parties at all levels must seek anti-oppression training. This training is designed to make people aware of the systems of privilege and oppression where­by a privileged group benefits at the ex­pense of people without such privileges. With­out an awareness of these systems, Green Party candidates will remain predominantly white and male.

Third, the Green Party must make a sustained effort to recruit women to run for office—for internal party positions as well as government office. Women come to the electoral table with additional hardships: lack of political experience, less socialization for public speaking and self-promotion, and less time to devote to campaigning because of family, work and party obligations. I’ve found as I recruit for the [National Green Party] Speakers Bureau that men on average are more likely to make the initial approach and are more confident in their ability to fulfill the requirements. Women on average require more contacts before considering it and more encouragement regarding their potential for success. This does not relate to ability, however, because once in the position, women do as well or better than men.

Fourth, the Green Party must set clear and equitable rules for candidate selection, and then follow those rules. When the rules of the game are clear, it’s possible for women to develop strategies to improve their representation. When the process is dominated by patronage, rules can be vague and shifting and decisions made by a limited number of persons. Some of the unequal treatment that the Green Party candidates for the 2008 presidential nomination experienced during the period leading up to the national convention related to this issue. Rules were put into place but were not followed consistently with every candidate.

Fifth, the Green Party must support electoral systems that support women. Here are several examples: a) by supporting proportional representation systems for elections—of the 10 highest-ranking countries in terms of women’s representation, all utilize proportional representation electoral systems; b) by reserving a certain number of party offices and candidate positions for women—my state Green Party in New York requires a certain percentage of party officers to be women; and c) by utilizing instant runoff voting for internal Green Party elections—instant runoff voting levels the playing field for women because it favors candidates who run positive campaigns, and allows voters to make better choices without fearing the worse candidate will win.

Ann Link

Sixth and finally, Green Parties must give equal financial support and access to party resources to the campaigns of women, regardless of their chance for winning. The resource issue came up during our decision-making process for allocating funds raised by the Green Senatorial Cam­paign Committee. We debated over whether to give all the money to a few male senate candidates who were polling well and getting a lot of media attention. We decided to divide it up equally among all the senate candidates, including three female candidates, who demonstrated viability by having a website, treasurer, and making visible efforts to campaign. It’s vital that women are at the table when these decisions are made.

In closing, the Green Party offers a unique opportunity for women to make a meaningful difference in how our world is managed. I hope all women in the Green Party will seriously consider running for office, and that they will get full support from the Green Party in doing so. Women have the strength, the life experience, the integrity, the leadership, and the vision to make the political changes necessary for our country and the world.

It’s time for spring cleaning and the Green Party is freshening up its look as we work to prepare for local races in 2015 and state and federal races in 2016. Maybe you’ve seen our new logo and great new graphics on social media—if you’re not following us on Facebook and Twitter, make sure to follow us at facebook.com/greenpartyus and twitter.com/greenpartyus.

Our new t-shirts are in stock in a green unisex style and black men’s and women’s style! Visit gp.org to check out our online store, and stock up for summer fairs and festivals!

When you’re on gp.org, visit our candidate’s page to see who is running for office in 2015. Some Green candidates have already won elections this year! If you know of any candidates running in 2015 or 2016, please let us know at office@gp.org.

Here in the national office we’re also cleaning up our contact lists so we can be in quick communication when election news breaks. Contact office@gp.org with updates on your state and local party activities, upcoming meetings or conventions, and new local campaigns.

As part of its ongoing strategic plan to reach out new voters and grow the party’s visibility through a positive brand identity, the Green Party of the United States has developed a new logo. A number of party leaders worked with graphic designers to create a custom logo intended to portray the party’s values professionally at a glance.

The new logo was introduced at last year’s Annual National Meeting and was quickly introduced on the party’s social media sites. Both the party’s Facebook and Twitter page now feature large, bright headers with the party’s new logo and the identify marker #WeAreGreen. The party has be­gun utilizing its new brand in its quarterly postal mailings to supporters, and has introduced t-shirts and tote bags featuring the new identity.

The party is working to roll out its new brand identity completely during 2015. The party is also taking the opportunity to do a complete overhaul of its website—gp.org— utilizing Nationbuilder, a cutting-edge organizing platform. Nationbuilder will allow the party to use new professional e-mail outreach tools and powerful new access to social media outreach.

Expect the new gp.org to be online in late spring or early summer of 2015.

Thank you for your support and Go Green!

Committee News

The Green Party’s Ballot Access Com­mit­tee and Coordinated Campaign Commit­­tee are helping Green candidates and state parties build throughout 2015 for the 2016 national election.

Coming out of the 2014 mid-term elections, the Green Party is in excellent position to build a strong ballot access base. The party has ballot access secured for the 2016 election in 21 states – compared to only 14 after the 2010 mid-term elections.

The Ballot Access Committee is helping state parties coordinate ballot drives in ten states in 2015—Arkansas, Alaska, Iowa, Kentucky, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, Utah, Vermont, and Wyoming. If you can help petition or coordinate activities in any of these states, please contact the Ballot Access Committee co-chairs at greenyager@gmail.com or jodytgrage@gmail.com.

The Coordinated Campaign Committee is working to train candidates to use best practices as they build campaigns for fall 2015 and 2016. The committee is holding monthly phone conferences to discuss issues such as volunteer deployment, media and messaging, fundraising and campaign finance, and special constituency outreach to labor, women’s, LGBT, minority, student and movement groups.